Well, they seem to catch some crumbs from the Oregonian's table. The crumbs seem to have gotten bigger the last few years... sounds like a they're part of the solution.

How about 50-50? Finding stuff the O doesn't is good, but rolling over for City Council (especially lately) is not real independent.

actually the Willamette Week is neither.
After the pulitzer they have not written any articles of any substance. (sure they have some interesting gossip). But come on, cover stories about Brazilian waxing??? They have been sitting on their laurels, they have lost thier stance as an independant source of local news with the community, they are now just an independant source of local distraction.

Once in a great while I think WW is part of the solution-like when it did the piece on the O and Tribune's fight about the Francke case -or the piece on how the O stirred up a larger than life meth epidemic. But it doesn't go the extra step and ask WHY or question what is going on below the surface of these events. No one seems to want to look at the inner workings of a political machine when it wears a "hip" patina, but I believe there are many of us out here who would stand behind reporters who would take on that task. The press' -or at least editorial-denial of documented problems, preferring hero worship (We love Homer, Vera and Mike Schrunk (And sure wish Neil could get us some dates! :) makes me wonder whether there are kick backs. People who care about a city feel obligated to sound an alarm when they see things that are wrong.

Didn't the WW do a big coverstory/expose on Homer a couple of years ago?

I think it may have; it did one on "Backroom Vera" in about 98. You sound like a planner TK and I favor planning, but something that grates with me is the boosterism and babbitry that seem too often to carry the day with both planners and the press. People schooled in urban planning know about growth management and development in sync with infrastructure capacity, but too frequently, imho, we seem to prefer politically determined and encouraged growth projections and grandiose schemes to transform the landscape all at once, consequences be damned. It's like we are fixated on a couple of plannning tools: urban renewal and the urban growth boundary. And that's not comprehensive planning.

As I noted in the "Buckle Up" thread, I don't work for the city, nor am I planner. Nor am I a blank check-booster of all endeavors by the city. But the conversation becomes all or nothing, as it seems to be in these threads, I fall firmly on the side favoring smart growth.

WW = Porkland's best enemy!

All I can say is, it's a good thing it is a free publication. I wouldn't pay to read it.

~K!

They've always been a problem unto themselves.

And since they continue to pretend to be 'alternative' - part of the Problem itself.

Hi (Un) Honest Abe.

You call Portland "Porkland"? That's funny considering Oregon gets the least BANG for our federal tax buck of any state.

Maybe you are talking about Intel, Inc. -- BIG FAT WHITE PORKERS DROOLING MONEY and paying a measley $10 in state taxes on a $10,000,000,000 annual profit. I read it in WW!

Don't get much PORKIER than that, Abe.

Willamette Week seems to be conflicted: they want transparency and open government, but when it comes to their pet agendas, they will take it anyway they can get it. WW, according to my sources investigated SoWhat well before the past elections, but failed to bring the story to print. Could it be that WW didn't want a story that negatively reflected on their endorsed candidates? Both encumbents representing the status quo. Yes, WW is conflicted, wanting "progressive" policy from the status quo. You tell me, am I wrong?

They are the solution to the problem of finding local chat lines.

Just want to note that my comments will be signed "TKrueg" instead of "TK" from now on because my comments are often conflated with Jim "JK" Karlock's .

Say Daphy,

Not all Pork originates in DC and Intel is a fine example, thanks.

SoWhat is another as is The Pearl as is . . .

Oops, you've done it again, Daphne.

Since 2000, Oregon has had about a one to one ratio of federal taxes paid to federal funds received. Putting Oregon around 35th out of 50. Far, far from the very bottom of the list.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ftsbs-timeseries-20060316.pdf

You really should think before you type.

Chris- you can't deny that Oregon gets far less than states like Texas, Florida, California and other big defense pork, er, budget states. If it were even a 2-1 ratio, that would have serious ramifications for our economy.

For every federal tax dollar given, we get it back. Which basically means Oregonians have paid entirely for every MAX (pork) project ourselves with no federal aid. What a great investment. I'm sure people in Madras and Coos Bay are really happy about that.

Moreover, it's Oregon's fault we don't receive more federal funding if that is your particular wont. We've had a Democrat governor and legislature for what, 20 years now? Most of our house members are Dems. It's obvious they've done a piss-poor job of attracting federally funded projects here. Go blame them for our poor ranking.

"I fall firmly on the side favoring smart growth."

Do let me know if you find any around here.

http://www.wweek.com/html/leada082698.html

j: You are correct that Willamette Week has been doing research on North Macadam. I do hope that they soon publish an indepth investigative report on NM that connects the dots. The O with Ryan Frank a few Sundays ago began to make the connections, but a more WW editorizing piece needs to be written that says it like it is-"shady dealings".

Hi Chris.

Does House Speaker Karen Minnis know the DEMS run her Legislature?

Here's 25 cents. Give her a call and tell her. She loves a good joke.

US Congress, not state legislature, Daphie.

Plus, you're nuts to think our legislature is not overwhelmingly left leaning.

Let's bring back Hatfield and Packwood. We can forgive Packy's wondering hands and wet lip kisses if he just brings home more bacon!!

BTW, is past seniority years good if you come back as a rerun?

Former Packy apologist Julia Brim-Edwards tells me there is not enough boxed wine at all the WalMart stores in the world to bring pack former Senator Bob Packwood.

But, yes, they did bring home -some- bacon, unlike Wyden, Smith and gang.

And we love Chris Mc backtracking on his quote: "it's Oregon's fault we don't receive more federal funding if that is your particular wont. We've had a Democrat governor and legislature for what, 20 years now?"

You didn't get Salem confused with Washington, DC again, did ya? Hope not. They are, like, really different.

I read the WW because it's a great free source for finding out what's going on entertainment wise around town. It has a long way to go before I would consider it a comprehensive source of legitimate information about what is going on in the community. There is a very liberal op-ed tone to their "serious" articles which makes me cringe at times. The endorsement of Sten was totally over the top and insulted my intelligence. All in all it comes off as a high speed college newspaper with sex personal ads. I do give them credit for putting out a good story here and there, and for deciding to discontinue their role as a conduit for prostitution in their advertising section. I give them a limp thumb up as being part of the solution for the time being.

Definitely part of the problem. It's faux muck racking. They're chasing after the nickel and dime thieves while ignoring the major cons (or waiting until 20 years have passed).

LOOK, they shout: we've outed another nickel and dime CRIMINAL. And the whole confluence of moralistic denigration of others is (ahem) paradoxical given the subject matter they always seem to gravitate back towards, just like the smutty advertising.

I read the WW because it's free and I love how alt weeklies display live music. I also like one of the film dudes. However, I haven't read a cover story in awhile. (have to say I miss Budnick at WW)
I am assuming from the comments above that your question was prompted but the lastest Oregonian "scandal."
For me the Oregonian bashing has gotten a little annoying. That is not to say I don't think the Oregonian should be critized but there seems to be some petty stuff happening and now I just find myself skipping over it all and that is a shame because there could be something legit there but I no longer care...